History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c33.s4.12

v3.c33.s4.12

The account given by Firishta of this expedition is, we think, wholly imaginary. Firishta places this event in 402 H. (1011 A. D.) and relates that Ānandapāla on learning Mahmud's intention to attack Thanesar and desecrate the famous idol there named Jagsom, although he was subordinate to Mahmud, submitted a respectful protest. But Mahmud refused saying that the followers of the religion of Mahomet exerted themselves in the subversion of idolatry to obtain reward in heaven. The Raja of Delhi thereupon called upon the Hindus of the whole of India to come together to defend the idol of Thanesar. But Mahmud attacked Thanesar before the Hindus could assemble. After capturing Thanesar, Mahmud wished to march on Delhi; his nobles told him that he could not safely do it till he had conquered and annexed the Panjab behind him. All this is pure imagination as Delhi was not then in such a leading position as to appeal to the Hindus of the whole of India. It was, if it had come into existence, an insignificant subordinate kingdom. The expedition again according to Utbi took place after the reduction of the Panjab to the position of an annexed province at the battle of Nazin ( Nandana ) and when Ānandapāla was already dead. Firishta by ante-dating this event has given this imaginary glowing account. Even Elliot rightly says here, though he restricts his remark to Delhi only, "There is nothing in the Yamini to warrant the reference to Delhi; the existence of which is nowhere alluded to by contemporary writers." ( Al-Beruni, as already stated, does not even mention Delhi in his geographical chapter). "The frequent mention by Firishta of Delhi and its Raja in connection with the Ghazni kings does not rest on solid foundation." ( p. 454 ). The fact is that writers coming four or five centuries later cannot divest themselves of their surroundings and must bring in Delhi which was so famous in their days.